Wait wait, I have a point!

So that big picture of Obama got me thinking about important stuff like, you know, ice cream, and the meaning of citizenship. But mostly ice cream.

Still, I can't help but draw parallels to the fetishistic treatment of veterans in contemporary American society and the attitude of Coriolanus. Here and now, in America, it is considered passe to criticize John McCain for poor policy decisions or the Keating Five incident because he was a veteran and a POW. And while I'm perfectly fine with people treating veterans well (especially since I'm, you know, hoping to end up one in a few years), I've got a major problem with what is, essentially, a freebie given to military folks in the public space on account of their time served. Whenever McCain said something stupid during his campaign, his time spent in a POW camp was brought up -- as if that experience should somehow make up for his failings.

Coriolanus, on the other paw, almost demands that the citizens give him this sort of treatment. Sure, he might not have any policies at all -- but so what, he's a veteran of a thousand (psychic) wars! 'Ods Blood, he's a war hero! And it's this lack of interest in giving him that kind of deference that drives him mad. Well, that and the fickle crowd and the scheming tribunes. But let's be totally honest here -- any Roman politician would have had to dealt with those things, and most of them managed to do so without ending up at the head of an invading army.

So where does citizenship come in? Well, here's the skinny. In early Rome, people were divided into voting blocks based on what quality of weaponry they could afford. Rich? Cavalry for you, my friend? Poor? Grab that bow, you're a soldier now! If you owned property and could afford weaponry, it was your duty to serve in the military when needed. Compare this to current day America where military service is a choice, a voluntary act. For doing his duty well, Coriolanus deserved some accolades. But certainly not the worship he seems to demand.